the sierras club

by **gordonye** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 10:13 pm

Day Hiker wrote:They protested and delayed the widening of a limited-access highway inside an urban area. So meanwhile, more commuters just sat in 15-mph traffic, wasting more time and fuel.

I'm not taking a position regarding what SC did, but there is a correlation between highway improvements and urban sprawl, even if the improvements are in an existing urban area. This is because the total amount of time for travelling from outlying "Sprawl" areas to the city is reduced. For example, if you reduce the driving time between Jersey City to Manhatten by half, that means further west in the exurbs of New Jersey residents' commute times for driving to Manhattan have also improved significantly. This makes properties in the exurbs more desirable, and makes developing residential properties more attractive to investors.

A way to stop sprawl without making traffic bad for the central city and without limiting land supplies legislatively would be to charge tolls for highways leading to the city.

by **Augie Medina** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 10:17 pm

rhyang wrote:Clubs are nice for people who are either not capable or unwilling to do things for themselves. Then there are the folks who need to have some kind of symbolic "position" and / or busy work to give some sense of purpose to their lives. For the average baby boomer who does not attend a church I suppose arranging newsletters and meetings and voting on meaningless "club" organizational stuff serves the same purpose. Others enjoy leading outings with newbies (or perma-newbies ) and get a big kick out of that kind of thing.

But it's also probably true that these silly singles clubs and hiking groups get people out into their local outdoors who might not otherwise go. I know it's true for a lot of people who are now fairly serious hikers and backpackers and climbers.

I was out climbing at Pinnacles yesterday on the east side. It was a warm sunny day and the popular areas were crowded. There were guided groups, small informal groups, and yes, a Sierra Club group. I've known a bunch of them for years. I don't do anything with them anymore, since I have my own network of climbing buddies and don't really need to be part of anything or in charge of anything. And quite honestly most of them fall into the above categories But that said, a few of them came to visit me when I was in the hospital -- they didn't have to do that. I see some of them occasionally at the climbing gym. It's a small world.

Now, now. Truth is, I do most of my outings with friends, but I also enjoy making new contacts that joining groups can afford. I figure you meant to express along the limes of "to each his own" but it comes close to sounding like "joining" is a social pathology.

by **MoapaPk** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 10:47 pm

gordonye wrote:
Day Hiker wrote:They protested and delayed the widening of a limited-access highway inside an urban area. So meanwhile, more commuters just sat in 15-mph traffic, wasting more time and fuel.

I'm not taking a position regarding what SC did, but there is a correlation between highway improvements and urban sprawl, even if the improvements are in an existing urban area. This is because the total amount of time for travelling from outlying "Sprawl" areas to the city is reduced. For example, if you reduce the driving time between Jersey City to Manhatten...

The irony is that the end was achieved in Vegas, at least temporarily, but not through actions of the Sierra Club. The bursting of the housing bubble slowed development on the outskirts dramatically.

The us-95 expansion had been on the books for years, and the BLM, with pressure from the city and county, has sold a great deal of land off 95 and off the Kyle Canyon Road (leading into the Spring Mountains) for development. This land was slated for "attainable" housing. The state encourages such sales, since NV is unique in being able to keep BLM land sales money, thanks to a deal worked out by Harry Reid in 1998. Our Congresspeople are generally pro-development (Dina Titus being a selective exception), so the powers that be, regardless of party, were really calling the shots. The SC skirted a confrontation with Reid, and chose instead to beat up the populace.

by **Luciano136** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:16 pm

squishy wrote:
Luciano136 wrote:I know a few people who do stuff with them that are nice.

However, each and every time I run into a group of them, they are either cranky or have an attitude. Not sure what their deal is???

I even had one group say when I asked "Are you guys the MLC SC?" one dude replied "Why, did our attitude give us away?" by which I replied, why yes, yes it did and I walked on...

I had a group of SC members wonder into our camp once at Finger lake near middle Pal. One of the women began talking to me like I had hiked up with them...I was like, lady, your standing in my living room and I've been here for three days, go away...well I didn't exactly say that but I wanted to...I then realized that they don't even know who's in their own hiking party...had another party yell up at me on Round Top, "don't go that way" as I headed to the Crescent Moon. I thought I was rude and loud but these guys crawl under my skin every time I see them now...the very 1st time I ran into a SC group was at Loon lake and I simply asked, "are you guys SC" they said "this is a private hike"..I was like, fuck, fine whatever, I guess you guys don't need members...I have since canceled my membership...even though I thought the card looked cool next to my NRA membership...oh well...they are very unfriendly, snobbish and elitist...when all they do is the mule route while talking shit...I personally don't want to have anything to do with them...it's extremely sad...what would Muir say?

My experiences exactly. I just get out to have fun, no matter what it is. I feel like they're always on a mission and don't necessarily enjoy it.

by **Day Hiker** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:33 pm

gordonye wrote:I'm not taking a position regarding what SC did, but there is a correlation between highway improvements and urban sprawl, even if the improvements are in an existing urban area. This is because the total amount of time for travelling from outlying "Sprawl" areas to the city is reduced. For example, if you reduce the driving time between Jersey City to Manhatten by half, that means further west in the exurbs of New Jersey residents' commute times for driving to Manhattan have also improved significantly. This makes properties in the exurbs more desirable, and makes developing residential properties more attractive to investors.

A way to stop sprawl without making traffic bad for the central city and without limiting land supplies legislatively would be to charge tolls for highways leading to the city.

It is wrong to constrict traffic flow and charge tolls in order to limit sprawl. Urban sprawl can be dealt with directly, with legal restrictions against it. (Not to mention more education and a bigger push against oversized families.) We shouldn't mess with transportation to indirectly influence sprawl.

Not everyone on a highway is there as a consequence of sprawl. Many are just passing through. I cannot drive to the Spring Mountains without driving on US95, the one recently widened but protested by the Sierra Club. But my place of residence is nowhere near the urban sprawl associated with that freeway.

You cannot realistically travel from Salt Lake to L.A. without driving on Interstate 15, right through Las Vegas, and a drive from Phoenix to Reno takes you right through Las Vegas on US95. Anyone driving those routes has nothing to do with any urban-sprawl problem in Las Vegas, and they shouldn't have to pay some stupid toll that is meant to discourage it.

by **Day Hiker** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:38 pm

squishy wrote:The SC would have to blow up the Hetch Hetchy dam to win me back...

Or the Glen Canyon Dam! Yes! (Just evacuate people downstream first.)

by **mconnell** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:47 am

squishy wrote:Oh come on Pete, you can do better than that. This is the appropriate time to bag on the SC and you give us this dry and boring post...add some color man...

He told me on another forum that the SC had banned climbing and BC skiing in northern CA, so I would expect a lot more hostility towards them. No wonder you all have so much time to post, since the mountains are closed.

by **Bob Burd** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:05 am

1000Pks wrote: but for the nth time, and if no one wishes to carpool and be navigated quickly, efficiently, and almost cost-free, helping to save the planet, I'll save my money and plan for a winter trip somewhere on my own.

Pete,

I'll be heading to Nevada Thursday night for ten days of desert fun. All class 3 or less, nothing with too many miles. Star, Granite, Ruby Dome, Wheeler, Moapa, Virgin, Muddy, Hayford, Stirling, and a few others. You've probably already climbed most of them, but it would give you a chance to get some exercise while we carpool. I'll be happy to let you navigate quickly and efficiently. Shall I pick you up on my way through Sacramento?

by **byates** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:56 am

1000Pks wrote:BTW, posting takes a different tack now, I click reply to this.. and am not directed to the log-in page, as before. I have to click sign-in at the top of the page, thusly another step to post anything. Can you change this back to how it was or what have you done?

I'll be heading to Nevada Thursday night for ten days of desert fun. All class 3 or less, nothing with too many miles. Star, Granite, Ruby Dome, Wheeler, Moapa, Virgin, Muddy, Hayford, Stirling, and a few others. You've probably already climbed most of them, but it would give you a chance to get some exercise while we carpool. I'll be happy to let you navigate quickly and efficiently. Shall I pick you up on my way through Sacramento?

This reminds me of a bet offer I made to a MLC SC'er who claimed about 500x that, "I can do anything you can." I thusly offered to bet him, at 10-1 odds, up to $1000, that he couldn't do a tenth of what I've done, the exact terms to be negotiated. Then, I had only climbed about 500 peak ascents. That shut him up for good, as easily he could have had his supposed climbing for two years paid in full, then, but he knew well he would never be able to do any of it.

I do need Virgin, but up north, it'll be too cold at night for me. I'd have to stay in lodging, just not worth it for 2X's and 3X's. I still haven't met you, and you'd probably drop me off in the middle of NV due to my speaking of the MLC SC.

Sounds like good fun for a guy like you, good luck if you do it. I'm envious of anyone who can do NV peaks in winter conditions!

Reads more like a 1000ego's than peaks.

by **Bob Burd** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:59 am

1000Pks wrote:BTW, posting takes a different tack now, I click reply to this.. and am not directed to the log-in page, as before. I have to click sign-in at the top of the page, thusly another step to post anything. Can you change this back to how it was or what have you done?

I'm not sure that there has been any change on the SP side, and if there was, it isn't under my control. Most folks just use the "Keep me logged in all the time" feature when logging on, then you don't have to go to any extra steps and can post much for efficiently. Some members have used this to advantage for upwards of 10,000+ posts.

by **MoapaPk** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 5:50 am

1000Pks wrote:I do need Virgin, but up north, it'll be too cold at night for me. I'd have to stay in lodging, just not worth it for 2X's and 3X's. I still haven't met you, and you'd probably drop me off in the middle of NV due to my speaking of the MLC SC.

For Virgin, camp at Whitney Pockets -- fairly low. It may be in the 30s at night, but that's not too bad. I'm sure Ruby Dome and Wheeler already have snow.

by **Bob Burd** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:09 am

1000Pks wrote: I could do a magnificent slide show, digitally or by Kodachrome, of almost every Western Pacific National Park and Monument, but they'd rather be chasing A or chomping down bad pizza and swigging lukewarm beer (more having the greatest time in their lives).

I've yet to see a mountaineering slide show, though I'm sure they are very nice. More than chasing A or the bad pizza thing or watching slides of what someone else did, I'd rather be out hiking and climbing. And burning tons of non-renewable fossil fuels. At least the MLC SC approves of that, right?

by **MoapaPk** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:41 pm

1000Pks wrote:I'd most likely lodge in Vegas, and just get up early to drive there. No big priority, the SC peak climbing is most likely on its way out. No one!

At least room in Mesquite.

The "road" up the normal DPS route washed out 5 years ago, so the trip is perhaps 2 miles longer than in the guide.

by **TheOrglingLlama** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:52 pm

So who's heading up to the Chicken Ranch this w/e ? Wanna split gas ??

14 hour nights ! That's what I'm talking about :mrgreen:

by **KathyW** » Fri Nov 20, 2009 2:18 am

You need extremes at all ends to reach a compromise somewhere in the middle. I've often wondered if some factions of the Sierra Club provide the extreme when it comes to environmentalism.

the sierras club

Who is online